Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

STATBANK: PORT VALE 3-3 CHARLTON

thanks to the 46 Lifers who gave marks










Comments

  • Options
    Tough 5 games coming up…

    Minor point - shouldn’t CBT be top of assists with all his being in the league?
  • Options
    Tough 5 games coming up…

    Minor point - shouldn’t CBT be top of assists with all his being in the league?
    never thought of it that way, yes you are probably correct
  • Options
    All very harsh on Edun imho. Thought he was our best player first half. 
  • Options
    edited January 8
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
  • Options
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
  • Options
    edited January 8
    Dazzler21 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
    Dazz, I think we should judge the player's performance, without being overly influenced by the score. If he'd played exactly the same, and we'd only conceded one goal, you're implying you would have marked him higher, which doesn't make sense to me. Jones was arguably  responsible for two of their goals, but you're linking the two performances together. It's also over simplifying things to blame the number of shots coming in on the two centre backs, when it's not just down to them - apart from the 3rd goal perhaps. You gave them both 5, whereas their performances were poles apart I thought.
  • Options
    Overall, despite wondering if fan/critics are watching the same match, by the time Lancs lad puts the averages up they are mostly a fair reflection.
    IF Charlton had held on for a 3-2 (3 time lead chucked away !) then the feel good factor would've pushed most players scores up a tad. 
    Just my opinion but the world seemed a better place (I must be on drugs) when Charlton win ( you need a good memory)
  • Options
    JamesSeed said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
    Dazz, I think we should judge the player's performance, without being overly influenced by the score. If he'd played exactly the same, and we'd only conceded one goal, you're implying you would have marked him higher, which doesn't make sense to me. Jones was arguably  responsible for two of their goals, but you're linking the two performances together. It's also over simplifying things to blame the number of shots coming in on the two centre backs, when it's not just down to them - apart from the 3rd goal perhaps. You gave them both 5, whereas their performances were poles apart I thought.

    JamesSeed said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
    Dazz, I think we should judge the player's performance, without being overly influenced by the score. If he'd played exactly the same, and we'd only conceded one goal, you're implying you would have marked him higher, which doesn't make sense to me. Jones was arguably  responsible for two of their goals, but you're linking the two performances together. It's also over simplifying things to blame the number of shots coming in on the two centre backs, when it's not just down to them - apart from the 3rd goal perhaps. You gave them both 5, whereas their performances were poles apart I thought.

    IN the end it is a matter of people personal thought on how They think platers performed - so why call out people whio have a different opinion to how you think a player performed.............just because you like that player!!
  • Options
    Opps looks like splet check took over !! - PlatersBoPeepAddick said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
    Dazz, I think we should judge the player's performance, without being overly influenced by the score. If he'd played exactly the same, and we'd only conceded one goal, you're implying you would have marked him higher, which doesn't make sense to me. Jones was arguably  responsible for two of their goals, but you're linking the two performances together. It's also over simplifying things to blame the number of shots coming in on the two centre backs, when it's not just down to them - apart from the 3rd goal perhaps. You gave them both 5, whereas their performances were poles apart I thought.

    JamesSeed said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
    Dazz, I think we should judge the player's performance, without being overly influenced by the score. If he'd played exactly the same, and we'd only conceded one goal, you're implying you would have marked him higher, which doesn't make sense to me. Jones was arguably  responsible for two of their goals, but you're linking the two performances together. It's also over simplifying things to blame the number of shots coming in on the two centre backs, when it's not just down to them - apart from the 3rd goal perhaps. You gave them both 5, whereas their performances were poles apart I thought.

    IN the end it is a matter of people personal thought on how They think platers performed - so why call out people whio have a different opinion to how you think a player performed.............just because you like that player!!
    Opps, Platers = Players

  • Options


    JamesSeed said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    JamesSeed said:
    Had enough of the Hector debate now, but the antis giving him 3s and 4s for a very solid performance seem to have skewed his mark. 
    It was an average performance by Hector and Jones. Hence conceding 3 and so many shots coming in. 
    Dazz, I think we should judge the player's performance, without being overly influenced by the score. If he'd played exactly the same, and we'd only conceded one goal, you're implying you would have marked him higher, which doesn't make sense to me. Jones was arguably  responsible for two of their goals, but you're linking the two performances together. It's also over simplifying things to blame the number of shots coming in on the two centre backs, when it's not just down to them - apart from the 3rd goal perhaps. You gave them both 5, whereas their performances were poles apart I thought.

    IN the end it is a matter of people personal thought on how They think platers performed - so why call out people whio have a different opinion to how you think a player performed.............just because you like that player!!
    It would be the same if I didn't like the player. I think it may have been when I noticed Pratley, who I didn't like (at least at first), getting really low marks after he started to play well, just because people didn't like him. It's all about fairness. If Hector has a stinker I'll mark him down, but he played well on Saturday and got threes, which didn't seem fair on the player. I'd say it was unfair on any player in the same position.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    edited January 8
    There were at least two occasions where the commentators called Hector out for being beaten far too easily. (I'll use their perspective otherwise I'll be accused of having an agenda). I think 'playing well' is a very subjective term, you have your view on what that means, other people have theirs, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. 

    A 6 seems like a very fair score on balance. Some people think he played well, others not so well, so he gets an average mark. I think you'd struggle to find any CB historically getting a 7 when the team has conceded 3 goals and drawn/lost.
  • Options
    He's certainly capable of being beaten too easily, as he was for Oxford's first goal. Saying that doesn't mean I have an agenda. I also think he could be replaced by better. I also believe anyone giving a three on Saturday was being unfair - that's just my opinion of course, which I'm allowed. I'll also admit I can be wrong (quite often), but I do try to be fair Chunsey. 😊
    PS I'm also aware that I'm banging on about Hector way too much. Apologies for that.
  • Options
    I’m not a massive fan of Hector, but he was pretty decent against Port Vale. Very unusually Jones was a bigger issue. 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!